Reprinted with permission from Thinking Right http://thinkingrightblog.com/pay-no-taxes-get-no-vote/#.UKGHMY4qa_c

No one who does not pay federal taxes should have the right to vote – period. We have finally reached the tipping point in America where those that have no financial stake in our government outnumber those that do. More than 200 years ago both the Founding Fathers and philosophers predicted the day when American democracy would end precisely the moment this unbalance was reached.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. (Alexis de Tocqueville)

The Founding Fathers set about to create a government that first of all would ensure liberty and then protect person and property – if effect, the Constitution protected the people FROM the government. To ensure against the momentary passions of a democratic majority, including spending the money of others, the Founding Fathers deliberately designed a governmental system in which most things cannot be done in a hurry and there are many checks and balances on what can be accomplished. Even so, Benjamin Franklin and other Founders thought it was unlikely the American experiment would last very long. John Adams wrote, “Democracy never lasts very long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” (Founding Fathers) De Tocqueville elaborated, “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” (Alexis de Tocqueville)

Voting was not a universal right under the constitution as drafted by the founding fathers. As one way of restraining excessive taxing and spending, the voting franchise was limited originally to white, male property owners because the Founders wanted the voters to have a vested interest in stability and property rights. (Original Right To Vote) It is actually a very recent phenomenon, since 1971, that most over 18 can vote. There is no original “fundamental” right to vote, it is a right that has grown and changed with the times. Unfortunately legitimate expansions of the franchise (women, people of color, youth) were adopted without reflection on other legitimate reasons to limit the franchise.

I can already hear the screams that I am both fascist and elitist – if those claims were true than so were the Founding Fathers who created an even more sharply controlled electorate than I am proposing. People also tend to forget that we ALREADY have limitations on the right to vote that everyone seems to accept. You have to be old enough (18), you have to be mentally competent, you cannot be an incarcerated felon. All of these limitations seem to be freely accepted.

Democrats have created a very successful party today by playing modern-day Robin Hood and using taxes to promise those not working or productive a way to live the American dream without the muss and fuss of the actual work. The resentment over this divide is growing, but unfortunately the productive side of American is now outnumbered by those living off of the work of others. We have reached that tipping point that both Benjamin Franklin and Alexis de Tocqueville predicted would spell the end to democracy in the United States.

We need to Amend the Constitution to require that to vote you must have some direct investment in the country. I would accept paying federal taxes as a threshold, but I just throw that out there as the start of the conversation.

That’s nice for the veterans and retirees, but you really haven’t addressed my hypothetical as it applies to others. The idea has lots of holes in it. And frankly, it strikes me as an idea designed to disenfranchise the poor. So they’re not working, no vote. They find a job, they can vote. The get laid off again, no vote. It’s bizarre.

Who are you trying to kid? This is all about revenge. You angry white boys are mad because you’ve lost the majority, so you’ve got to devise some sort of scheme to tip the balance back in your favor.
What really amazes me though, is that you are not ashamed to put your name on this ‘plan’. Boy, talk about going over the edge … .

So people who have no tax liability through shelters and such wouldn’t be able to vote?

Along the same lines does somebody who makes twice as much as you gets twice as many votes?

Do you think that the rich haven’t bought enough politicians to skew the rules in their favor far enough. I think everybody knows that the percentage of wealth held by a very small group ( oh let’s call them the 1% ) is growing every year, along with CEO pay, etc. How much is enough?

I think that the American Republic will collapse not because of entitlements, but because the rich will have taken all of the money, and there won’t be any left for the 99%.

Good luck with amending the Constitution to enact a poll tax. Wingnut.

what a bunch of huge crap from democrap . you have been to many ocupoo meetings I think that the American Republic will collapse not because of entitlements, but because the rich will have taken all of the money, and there won’t be any left for the 99%. oh really look at what is going on here in california . with entitlements where unions own the state , where their is nothing but gov employees and not enough tax payers , so your thinking tax the rich , tax the rich , what happenes when the rich say enough , im leaving cali then is left with nothing but takers , will u blame the rich , or the republicans , or bush haaaaa ..

The Red States are the recipient states. The Blue States are the donor states in Federal taxes and spending. I say either cpa spending at no more than what the stat provides in Federal revenues. Since the greatest wailing and gnashing of teeth comes from Reps that represent Red States, give them wha they want. cap at no more than what the state pays. The Blue States can still donate but that excess should go to pay down the deficit,. Hows that?

More voter suppression from the right wing. Here’s an idea: Rather than trying to make it more difficult for certain people to vote or to completely take away certain people’s right to vote, why not come up with better ideas and actually win people over? It’s not that the wrong people are allowed to vote. It’s that the American people are no longer buying what the right wing is selling.

“We need to Amend the Constitution to require that to vote you must have some direct investment in the country. I would accept paying federal taxes as a threshold, but I just throw that out there as the start of the conversation. ”

……… kind of, just repeal the 16th and let each state figure out how they will pay their share. And since the share would not include borrowing, Californian’s would find our share tripled.

So what’s your answer? Can you pay to play in politics if you pay no taxes?

This whole premise is insane.

skallywag

Posted November 13, 2012 at 8:06 AM

It is not insane – we are talking about voting – not contributions. Those who are sucking at the government welfare teet, and not contributing to the betterment of society, should not vote – and most of those on welfare are white – so don’t throw racism out there.

Top Contributors
This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organizations’ PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

I don’t agree with the “pay no taxes get no vote” idea. Suppose a person contributes to a Roth IRA as their entire retirement? And there are other circumstances where one has pre-paid taxes on current income.

It’s just silliness — Willis is trying to change the subject. This goes into the “send this to voters later and ask them if they can believe how craven certain Republicans are” file. “We’re gonna need a bigger file, right?”

Wow, so many things wrong with the details of the no tax, no vote argument, but as the author indicated it is just to start the conversation about a direct investment. Some details already addressed above this was how it were to be such as tax loss years, soc sec, retirees, students, etc…however one that is a huge problem for me is simply establishing another gov’t agency to have oversight on this…expansion of gov’t for something that is already a right. Hard enough to register to vote as it is now, think about how hard it will to establish rights to vote in the future.

I personally have always thought there to be something about having a direct investment on those who vote on certain items and that direct investment is more than just residency in my opinion. It is always easy to raise taxes on everyone except yourself for example while it is another to vote to raise taxes that do not directly impact the voter. It is easier to vote to raise bus fares if you don’t pay bus fares. It would be easier to vote to go to war if you don’t have a child in the forces. And the list goes on…

Obviously from the federal perspective, we are not voting on specific items (i.e. taxes, foreign policy, etc…) but instead are electing representatives who we believe will act in the best interest of us and our neighbors. There are so many different items that our elected officials determine other than tax policy, so to utilize taxes as a measure of federal direct investment seems to be a difficult stretch.

However, considering the number of posts on this article, perhaps it did get some people thinking- although likely thinking that the other side is wacky, regardless of which side one sits.

*Willis boy……sorry we came late to the party. Landowners…..remember? Those were the first people allowed to vote by our founding fathers. That didn’t change for almost 100 years. How about just having the Governor’s of each state nominating the US Senators? That lasted for more than 100 years. How about just making International Merchants pay tariffs? That lasted another 150 years.

Voting for women, minorities and out of work folks? Nah….why should they be able to vote?

How about this: Everyone that doesn’t pay Federal Taxes….doesn’t have to pay any State Taxes either? You can just go move to a state without sales tax. Or a County…or a City……maybe you can find some Federal Indian Land …..that is unoccupied and live in a cave…..that is our suggestion!